Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.

Great comment about getting out of the car while in a national park. You can't beat the views from the hiking trails (unless perhaps you're a serious rock climber).

That said, we do enjoy the large sunroof ("pano roof") in our Model S when driving at moderate speeds through scenic areas. I'm sure we'd also appreciate the views from the Model X. But that wouldn't be a key reason for us to buy the vehicle; we see these things as nice perks.

Tesla owner asks for $1 million after Model X caught on fire in crash and Falcon Wing doors wouldn’t open

Tesla is currently investigating an accident that happened in February in Guangzhou where a Model X crashed on the highway and caught on fire. The owner of the vehicle and her boyfriend were sitting in the second-row seat and they claim that the Falcon Wing doors were not opening after the crash resulting in them being stuck in the backseat while the car was starting to catch on fire.

They managed to exit through the front door just as the vehicle went up in flames, but not without injuries and now they are asking Tesla for 8 million Chinese yuan (~$1 million) in compensation...

They started to hear the battery cells explode and managed to exit through the front door. A few seconds later, the Model X went up in flames.

Here’s a video of the aftermath (warning it’s graphic – and vertical):..

...Here is the dramatic video of the fire, posted Sunday by Electrek and showing Lee’s face bloody from what she says is a broken nose. By her own account, she had it easy; her driver, she claims, was hospitalized for more than a month after his airbag didn’t deploy.

Tesla’s official comment is even-handed but still cites the owner, saying that all cars can catch on fire so this isn’t a big deal...

Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.

Great comment about getting out of the car while in a national park. You can't beat the views from the hiking trails (unless perhaps you're a serious rock climber). That said, we do enjoy the large sunroof ("pano roof") in our Model S when driving at moderate speeds through scenic areas. I'm sure we'd also appreciate the views from the Model X. But that wouldn't be a key reason for us to buy the vehicle; we see these things as nice perks.

Love the views to/from my way to the trails. Heading to Glacier National Park, MT in the Model X in the near future.

From the last time I was there ...

The Tesla FindUs ( https://www.tesla.com/findus ) map now has planned future (2017) SuperChargers on it. Here are the Montana ones (see GREY).Glacier National Park is right between the top to grey pindrops.

dgpcolorado wrote:How about at 80 mph, the speed limit on a lot of highways nowadays? I never understood the attraction of convertibles.

They certainly aren't for everyone. Or even most. But my old S2000 was remarkably quite in the cabin even on the highway. A properly designed convertible directs the airflow over your head, keeping a pocket of "still" air in the cabin. And by "still", I mean it feels still to the driver since it is traveling at the same speed as the car.

GRA wrote:Think how much better the view would be if he got out of the car! Having once owned a convertible, everything else falls into the also-ran category, view-wise.

How about at 80 mph, the speed limit on a lot of highways nowadays? I never understood the attraction of convertibles.

I once drove my Datsun 2000 up to Mt. Shasta via I-505 and I-5 averaging 85 most of the way, and that car lacked the modern aero mods that have eliminated most of the draft around the driver and passenger. No problem at all, beyond the lack of air conditioning and the 80-90 temps (I'd gotten an early start to avoid the afternoon triple-digit temps. As this was around 1980, I didn't have access to another car with A/C). It's true that a convertible's advantages are often quite climate/season/condition-specific, but I think everyone would enjoy trying one once for the experience when the weather's nice. In fall, I often used to take mine out onto the twisting rural roads in Marin County early on Sunday mornings, dressed in a wool sweater, a hooded windbreaker, watch cap and driving gloves, with the tonneau covering just the passenger side, the windows rolled up and the heater on. Worked fine, at least for my then ca. 20 year-old self, and I gave the car and myself a good workout when no one else was out there who could be injured if I boobed.

scottf200 wrote:Love the views to/from my way to the trails. Heading to Glacier National Park, MT in the Model X in the near future.

<snip>

The Tesla FindUs ( https://www.tesla.com/findus ) map now has planned future (2017) SuperChargers on it. Here are the Montana ones (see GREY).Glacier National Park is right between the top to grey pindrops.

I saw that when they put up the 2017 map, and it's about damned time they provide access to Glacier. Here's hoping they actually build these before the summer vacation season rather than after, as happened with Jackson and several other N.P. access SCs over the past two years or so. I've been asking them for SCs on the approaches for about 3 years now, although Kalispell and Shelby are a bit far from the park and each other (although O.K. if they put some L2s inside) - I would have preferred West Glacier, Browning and/or St. Mary, and then there's the still idiotic location of the I-90 SC in Superior rather than St. Regis or somewhere west of it, imposing an entirely unnecessary 28 mile (round-trip) detour for eastbound I-90 travellers to Glacier. And this all assumes that they actually build them this year. IIRR, both the I-15 SCs and Kalispell as well as the I-94 SCs were on the 2016 map, and I-94 was also on the 2015 one. While I've often said that I think I-94 west of Fargo should be the very last segment of primary interstate to get SCs, the failure to provide convenient SC access to all of the major western national parks and monuments at a much earlier date has always struck me as a curious blindspot at Tesla.

Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'.Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Tesla owner asks for $1 million after Model X caught on fire in crash and Falcon Wing doors wouldn’t open

Tesla is currently investigating an accident that happened in February in Guangzhou where a Model X crashed on the highway and caught on fire. The owner of the vehicle and her boyfriend were sitting in the second-row seat and they claim that the Falcon Wing doors were not opening after the crash resulting in them being stuck in the backseat while the car was starting to catch on fire.

They managed to exit through the front door just as the vehicle went up in flames, but not without injuries and now they are asking Tesla for 8 million Chinese yuan (~$1 million) in compensation...

They started to hear the battery cells explode and managed to exit through the front door. A few seconds later, the Model X went up in flames.

Here’s a video of the aftermath (warning it’s graphic – and vertical):..

...Here is the dramatic video of the fire, posted Sunday by Electrek and showing Lee’s face bloody from what she says is a broken nose. By her own account, she had it easy; her driver, she claims, was hospitalized for more than a month after his airbag didn’t deploy.

Tesla’s official comment is even-handed but still cites the owner, saying that all cars can catch on fire so this isn’t a big deal...

...After 28 minutes, I started seeing dotted line. This is probably due to battery overheating. The stators would overheat much quicker if I did full accelerations.

After the run, I calculated a whopping 7 kWh heat loss that was not counted in the trip meter. This was due to battery and motors heating up due to high power output. So the real power consumption was actually 630 Wh/km, 1014 Wh/mi....